1. Implementation of a
Simulation-Based
Operator Training
System
at
Barrick Pueblo Viejo
October, 2011

2. Presenters
Paul Yaroshak
Kevin Argudin

3. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
 Questions

4. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
 Questions

5. Company Background
 3 Companies involved in this project
 Barrick Gold Corporation
 Pueblo Viejo Site
 Lakeside Process Controls
 Local Business Partner of Emerson Process Management
 Mynah Technologies
 Simulation Software Developer and System Integrator

6. Barrick Gold: A Global Company
Pueblo Viejo
Dominican Republic

7. Introduction
 Challenges
 New processing facility, not yet built.
 Need to prepare operators as early as possible.
 Objectives
 Safe Startup
 Efficient Startup
 Solution
 “Ready for Start Up” program (RFSU)
 Dynamic Simulation is a component of RFSU

8. Introduction
 The “Ready for Start Up” Program (RFSU)
 Prepares operators for safe and efficient plant startup
 3 components:
 Training on Process Fundamentals using computer-based
interactive training modules (textbook).
 Simulation-Based Training
 Field demonstration and practice

9. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
 Questions

10. Project Background
 Pueblo Viejo will produce 1 million ounces of gold per year
 The plant will process 24,000 tons of ore /day at full
production capacity.
 DCS platform is DeltaV Version 10.3, approximately 11,000
DST.
 Complex plant with many processes, requires a variety of
skills and experience.

11. Pueblo Viejo Processing Site
Iron 1
Thickener
Autoclaves
Acid
Wash /
Stripping Cyanide
Destruction
Limestone Copper Carbon In
Crushing Recovery Leach

12. Business Need
 Prepare operations team for safe and efficient plant
startup (RFSU)
 A dynamic process simulator should provide the
following benefits:
 Meet aggressive startup / production deadlines
 Process understanding and familiarity with control system.
 Hands on practice of SOP
 Promote safe production / Mitigate risk of equipment damage
 Qualify resources for a wide range of roles within the facility
 Build organization capability to leverage the system for future
training needs

13. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
 Questions

14. Simulator Selection
 Several alternatives were evaluated.
 Low/medium level of fidelity (complexity) is sufficient for
training simulation.
 The Mimic Dynamic Simulator from Mynah was selected
 Provides required levels of fidelity (complexity).
 Integrates seamlessly with DeltaV
 Project EPCMs already using Mimic
 Relatively easy to use and change (for implementing model
changes and control system enhancements)
 Intuitive

15. Simulation Fidelity
 Select Simulation Fidelity (i.e. complexity) needed to
achieve business results
 Low Fidelity – Basic I/O tiebacks with simple tuning
 Medium Fidelity – Engineering first principles, conservation of
energy and mass
 High Fidelity – Mass / energy transfer equations, differential
equations, empirical models, etc.
 Fidelity Breakdown on Pueblo Viejo Simulator
 Low Fidelity – 70%
 Medium Fidelity – 20%
 High Fidelity – 10%

16. Simulation Environment
Real-World Environment Virtual (Simulated) Environment
DeltaV Controllers DeltaV Simulate
Simulated by
DeltaV Simulate
Process Operator &
Dynamics I/O I/O Controller
Response
Field Devices &
Process Dynamics
MiMiC Simulation
Software
Simulated by Mimic

17. Project System Architecture

18. DeltaV Graphic and Trainer Screen

19. Mimic Trainer Screen

20. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
 Questions

21. Project Org Chart

22. Geographically Distributed Team
Barrick
Barrick Toronto, Canada
(Pueblo Viejo)
Dominican Republic
Hatch
Toronto,
Canada
Fluor
Vancouver, Canada
Lakeside Mynah
Toronto, Canada St Louis, MO

23. Proposed Project Design Process
 Waterfall Model: Sequential Development Process

24. Project Reality
• Late changes
• Control strategy errors
Circuit 1 • Graphic updates
• Missing definitions
• Model misalignment
Circuit 2
Circuit 3

25. Why an Iterative Development Approach
works
 Lower risk; the waterfall is higher risk
 Early risk mitigation and discovery
 Accommodates and provokes early change;
 Manage complexity
 Confidence and satisfaction from early, repeated success
 Early partial product
 Relevant progress tracking; better predictability
 Higher quality; less defects in final product
 Final product better matches true client desires
 Early and regular process improvement
 Communication and engagement required
 “I’ll know it when I see it” required

26. Simulation Development
 Develop an Excel model
 Provide DeltaV Configuration
 DeltaV Simulate: Perform Simulate Conversion
 MiMiC: Create I/O Tie-Backs
 MiMiC: Implement Medium and High Level Models
 MiMiC: Develop Trainer Screens
 Initial Review
 Incorporate changes
 Final review

27. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
 Questions

28. Business Results Achieved
 Expected Reduction is Commissioning Time
 Early identification of issues
 Enhanced familiarity with system complexities.
 Unanticipated benefits
 Early identification of usability and logic issues.
 Circular Interlocks, incorrect alarm limits
 Identification of HMI errors and issues
 Sequence development/testing
 Development of SOPs
 Improved training material
 Trainers have a working system to develop on and not via memory
and documents alone

29. Lessons Learned
 Plan on Low Fidelity simulation of the complete DeltaV
Areas
 Alarms need to be managed (to avoid false alarms).
 Develop first principle models in Excel.
 Consider iterative design process from the start.
 Early engagement of the end users (get buy-in)
 Distributed Project team can be successful
 Develop a plan early with system integrators to implement
identified Control Strategy and HMI issues.

30. Opportunities for Improvement
 Version control of simulation system (model logic & trainer
screens)
 Snapshots that better accommodate a changing DeltaV
database
 Improved support for empirical data in Mimic e.g. data
tables

31. Agenda
 Introduction
 Project Background
 Technology Selection
 Project Execution
 Benefits & Lessons Learned
 Summary
Questions

32. Summary
 The project had unforeseen benefits of helping us
 Improve the final production control system
 Increase general understanding of our process.
 Approaching the project in an iterative fashion enabled our
team to succeed
 Process simulation enabled the business to achieve the
desired results
 Trained Users
 Developed Operations Documents
 Early adoption and entrenchment of the Process Control System

33. Special Thanks To
 Mynah  Barrick
 Adisa Shaljani  Benoit Bissonette
 Todd Anstine
 Lakeside
 Hatch  Jorge Jimenez
 Will McCombe
 Andy McEwen

34. Questions

35. Where To Get More Information
 Simulation with MiMiC Course 7041
 Mynah - www.mynah.com
 Lakeside Process Controls www.lakesidecontrols.ca